Week 7: Assignment - Argument Evaluation

    The first argument from Clean Needles Benefit Society is about the willingness of drug abusers to seek out clean needles.  The premise is that "addicts know shared needles are HIV transmitters" and "drug users will seek out clean needles."  The implied conclusion is that if clean needles are made available then drug users will make use of them and thus stop the spread of HIV among IV drug abusers.  The premises do support the conclusion.  Furthermore, the premises are reasonable, as it is logical to think that people who know HIV is transmitted by needles would use clean needles if they became freely provided.
    The second argument from Clean Needles Benefit Society is that free needles cost less than AIDS treatment for taxpayers.  The premises are that "28% of AIDS cases are IV drug users" and that "AIDS treatment costs taxpayers far more than the price of a few needles."  The conclusion is implied that by making needles available for free it will save tax payers money.  The premises do support the conclusion.  Furthermore, these premises are reasonable, but this is only in light of them following the statistics earlier in the article that HIV infections are down by 35% in New Haven where they tried this program.  Otherwise, it might seem unreasonable that the method would work and thus the taxpayer would be paying for treatment and needles.
    The first argument from Programs Don't Make Sense is that by providing needles it provides a better drug experience.  The premise is that new needles "results in less pain and scarring."  There is also the implied premise that this removes a deterrent for existing drugs users to quit and new users to start.  The conclusion is also implied that by making the injections more pleasant it will make getting drug abusers to quit more difficult.  The premises do support the conclusion.  Furthermore, it is reasonable to believe that by making the injection process more pleasant that it will either encourage drug use; or, in the minimum, remove a significant deterrent to drug use.
    The second argument in Programs Don't Make Sense is that by offering free needles it encourages drug abuse.  The premise is that by providing the free needles demand will increase, as demand in Hartford, CT was four times what was anticipated.  The implied conclusion is that it will increase drug abuse.  The premises somewhat support the conclusion, and is somewhat logical.  It is reasonable in the sense that it does lend credibility to drug use by providing drug paraphernalia, something that can only be implied from the argument. On the other hand, the premise is unreasonable because the government is not subsidizing drugs and thus not increasing their demand, but is only subsidizing the needles.  Since this would primarily affect drug abusers who already share needles this is not much of a cost savings for them.

© Erik Smith 2005
Licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License